The Misconceptions with Lead Core Bullets (Cup and Core)
Starting out, I'll give an example scenario: let's say a skeptical hunter has been on the internet looking at others' experiences hunting and has seen many folks talk about their successes using match style "target" bullets on their hunts. He decides to give it a go himself and buys a box of Hornady ELDMs or Sierra TMKs (just as an example), works up a good load, and is ready to go out on a hunt. He has this beautiful buck come walking out at 280 yards, it's quartering heavily towards him, yet he aims in his usual spot (just behind the shoulder). He takes the shot, the buck leaps, then makes an attempt at running, gets about 5-10 yards, and then piles up. Upon getting to the animal, he discovers there's no exit wound. This has already raised a flag for him, as he has been raised to desire an exit to create a blood trail if tracking is required, which typically it has been in the past with the bullets he's used to using. So now he's already thinking this bullet hasn't really performed as he'd hoped or thought it should. Now he begins to field dress the buck, and during the process has discovered the bullet did a good number on the rear lobe of the left lung. He then sees multiple lacerations on the liver, then sees bits of rumen and evidence the bullet traveled into the guts. He's now even more convinced this bullet didn't perform well due to the mess he's seeing. He's found bits of jacket and bits of lead here and there in the cavity and tissues as well. He's concluded the bullet completely came apart and has deemed it failed as a result. He's just made the conclusion that he was right, these bullets have no place in hunting as they just "blow up" and don't even produce an exit wound so you can properly track it.
So let's stop and take a closer look at that example. Let's clear our minds and any bias based on what you might have been previously taught. In that particular scenario, a tougher constructed bullet, such as the highly popular Remington Core Lokts, Nosler Accubonds or Partitions, Hornady ELDX or SST, etc, etc might have actually performed much worse with that particular shot. They typically wouldn't have come apart quite as much and while the animal likely would still have died at some point, it also most likely would have been a much slower death and very likely would have run a long way before succumbing to its wounds and/or asphyxiation. Yes, an exit would have, could have, proved useful in that scenario. It's very possible any of those bullets would have simply gone through the rear of the lung and punched out between the liver, and in that scenario, a lot of times death doesn't occur for a long time.
Bullets such as Sierra TMKs, Hornady ELDMs or A-Tips, Bergers of the hybrid design, etc are actually very forgiving to less than ideal shot placements like in that example because they do indeed come apart and they'll inflict much more damage, create much wider wounding, and cause a much faster death. The softer/frangible bullets still tend to shed enough material outwards that they'll still hit liver and/or lung when shot placements aren't ideal and are in that "no man's land", and will typically still cause enough blood loss to find and recover the animal not far from where it was shot.
What a lot of people see when using bullets like the TMKs, Bergers, ELDMs, etc is what looks like the bullet came apart and didn't exit, and to them it seems like poor performance, but what they fail to realize and comprehend is what's right in front of them. They actually DO have the animal and they're actually able to cut it open to see those results, rather than still out there trying to find the animal.
When a bullet actually fails, you don't have an animal to examine, typically, so it's easy to make that misconception. The animals that get hit with shots like that and with bullets like Core Lokts, etc, and the animal simply takes off never to be found, is when most people think they simply missed. In reality, most times they do hit the animal, but the bullet did not transfer enough energy to drop it, nor create sufficient blood loss in a timely manner to cause a quick enough death to even see the animal ever drop.
A lot of hunters tend to only look at the deer/animals recovered and create a bias on the perceived results based solely on those instances. They don't factor in the ones that got away because they either figure they missed, or they simply never see the results to even know what really happened inside the animal and with that particular bullet. In my example, they see a bullet that came apart and want to assume that it's poor performance, even if the animal dropped on the spot or only went a few feet or yards. They tend to focus on things they've heard or have been told and only focus on the small picture rather than the big picture and what's right in front of them.
Many people want to conclude that a bullet that didn't exit failed. Honestly, if it truly failed, you wouldn't have the animal to even see that it didn't exit. More times than not, the true failures are the times the animal was never recovered because the bullet simply didn't inflict sufficient trauma to cause a quick enough death, or death at all. Bullets that create exits that allow for a blood trail, and a blood trail that's actually needed to track it, are also, in my opinion and experience, to be considered not ideal performance since needing to track it via a blood trail is a sign that death did not occur as fast as it could or should have. That said, no bullet is going to work 100% of the time, every time. There are always going to be anomalies with both the bullet, and the particular animal. Some animals are dead on their feet and can defy all odds and logic and still manage to run without having any of its vital organs still intact. It's truly remarkable sometimes. These situations shouldn't be cause for rejection either.
The Meat Saver
Moving on, another common misconception and misunderstood subject involves meat loss/damage and meat saving shots.
The amount of meat damage with certain shots will always depend on bullet construction/composition, impact velocity and amount of resistance, and things like angle of the shot, muscle tension and density upon impact. A relaxed shoulder will typically result in a different amount of wounding versus a contracted shoulder. Even the bullet's RPMs has a big influence on wound channel size as well, in regard to centrifugal forces causing the bullet to come apart more or less.
Besides headshots and gut shots, it's near impossible to get reliable and repeatable results- killing quickly and humanely (not talking ethics here)- without losing at least some meat. It's just the nature of the beast. Proper bullet selection is crucial. By placing your shot accordingly, based on that particular bullet and the impact velocity it'll be at when it hits the animal, and at the distance you engaged it, you can balance out the amount of expansion and penetration and achieve best results with minimal meat damage yet still achieve an emphatic death.
Hunters that desire a quick and clean kill with zero meat loss in a repeatable, consistent, and reliable manner are living in a fantasy world, sorry to say. Sure, you can get lucky, but getting lucky is not a repeatable, consistent, and reliable thing.
Blood loss is what kills most efficiently, reliably, and quickly. Hitting an animal in the body and inflicting enough blood loss to kill the animal quickly, but not lose any meat is just not something you can count on. You run more of a risk losing an animal with bullet performance like that than you do dropping them and killing them quickly. And honestly, if you use the right bullet, within the limits of that bullet, you're really not going to lose a lot of meat with a shoulder shot. Guys act like shoulder meat is the best meat on the animal and that they're going to lose so many pounds of meat placing their shot there. That's simply not true. Not unless you used the wrong bullet or placed it in the shoulder when it would be impacting well outside its limits, as in too high of an impact velocity and/or amount of resistance for the bullet type and weight you're using. That'll result in shallow penetration and over-expansion near the surface. That indeed will result in more meat lost, but that's not the bullet's fault or necessarily the shot placement's fault either. It's the hunter's/shooter's fault for not knowing that would be a poor shot placement under the circumstances for that particular bullet. That's just the harsh reality of it. That's when a behind-the-should shot, or neck shot, or even head shot would actually be a better choice, if you're in that scenario with not an ideal bullet combo.
Bullets that don't shed weight and that hold together do tend to reduce meat loss/damage, but that comes at a trade-off. Typically, the overall amount of wounding is less with that type of bullet. If it impacts below its ideal velocity, the amount of wounding will be even less. If you miss vitals, you may very well miss recovering the animal too. A well-constructed cup and core bullet, for example, that will indeed shed weight can be much more forgiving in that particular scenario since it would produce wider wounding and may still reach vitals and be the difference between recovering the animal or not.
Ultimately, there are multiple factors to consider, but in my experience and all the research and studying I've done and with all the other info shared out there from others' hunts and experiences, I have concluded you simply cannot guarantee consistent, reliable, repeatable quick and clean kills with zero meat loss. It's always been worth it to me to pick the right bullet and place it accordingly and lose a little meat than it is to risk losing ALL the meat by potentially not recovering the animal.
You can't guarantee a particular presentation of the animal either to count on executing your favorite shot placement. You can, however, still place your shot in other ideal areas to give you desired results- that being a quick and clean kill and a recovered animal.
When a hunter starts talking about how they want a bullet that penetrates deep, doesn't damage meat, and gives them a big blood trail to follow, it immediately tells me they don't fully understand terminal ballistics and bullet construction/composition, and the anatomy of the animal they're hunting, along with the basics in effective killing of game animals. You do not NEED a blood trail if you truly know what you're doing, are using the best bullet for the job, and place it in the appropriate place according to the situation you're presented with. A lot of people like to use the phrase "if I do my part". Well, I say that means knowing all the things I just mentioned. Also, if you actually use the right bullet and can implement the high shoulder shot under your particular circumstances, you won't need a blood trail to track it.
Touching on Energy
This leads me to yet another misconception often discussed and touted as a crucial factor and something used as a minimum factor for a particular load/ammunition they're using, and that's energy. Personally, I stopped even looking at energy numbers several years ago now. It's just not even a concern of mine if I know the minimum impact velocity limitation of the particular bullet I'm using, and if I'll be within/above it. Impact velocity, sectional density (bullet mass), and shot placement are the main factors I worry about, and the things that influence those things. Energy is great, don't get me wrong, but it's only a potential and the bullet has to transfer that energy for it to really work in your favor.
Ultimately, you still need to inflict sufficient blood loss along with transferring any energy. That's what's most important. So, an extra 100-300fps or 200-400ft-lbs, for example, isn't really going to matter much. What really should be the focus is impact velocity as a threshold number, not energy. Energy, in regard to bullets and terminal ballistics, is only a potential, and if the bullet doesn't expand properly, it won't dump all the energy into the animal anyways. How a bullet performs terminally is dependent upon impact VELOCITY, the amount of resistance it encounters upon impact, and of course the construction/composition of the particular bullet used.
Most of the minimum energy figures you see stated and recommended out there are not good information and are made by those that either don't fully understand, or don't understand at all, terminal ballistics. It's unfortunately given many others a false sense of what is important too. When you see bullet manufacturers, conservation agencies, big names in the industry, etc. talk about minimum energy needed, it's easy to trust them and believe it's a figure you need to look at, but it's just not. If the bullet doesn't expand properly, it won't transfer that energy at the right time, or at all. What ultimately kills is blood loss. Transferring/dumping a ton of energy is beneficial only to shut down the central nervous system (CNS). That'll drop the animal, putting it into a temporary coma, allowing it to bleed out where it lies.
So ideally, yes you do want sufficient energy, but if you're not using the right bullet and not placing it in the right area, it won't matter. You could have 2000 ft-lbs of energy in a bullet at the time of impact, but if the bullet punches or pencils right through, most all that energy just exits with the bullet and the animal typically gets away. So, what did all that energy do for you? Nothing.
My figures with ideal impact velocity ranges come from tons of personal research and experience, not from advertisements from manufacturers. Once you get a really good grasp on terminal ballistics and bullet construction/composition, and know how certain types of bullets perform terminally, you can look at a particular bullet that you haven't used personally and you can already form a really good idea and presumption of how that bullet will perform based on that prior experience.
The thing that's helped hunters using magnum cartridges (or any cartridge pushing typical high velocities) is the velocity they achieve, not so much the energy they produce. The impact velocity tends to be more than sufficient at typical ranges they're used. With those cartridges though, and using softer constructed bullets below .260 sectional density, and on larger/tougher game, especially with shot placements where resistance upon impact is high, you can experience shallow penetration and over-expansion.
That said, there's actually plenty of vitals behind the shoulder, and if the animal is quartering to, pretty much all the vitals will be through the shoulder. So, with the right bullet, used where it would still be within its limits (sufficient mass, impact velocity, etc), that's a great placement even though resistance will typically be high. The lungs hold the most blood and a double lung shot will allow an animal to bleed out quicker than a heart shot, especially if the heart is still pumping. The biggest parts of the front lobes of the lungs are behind the shoulder of most animals. There's an autonomic plexus (nerve bundle) behind the shoulder too- the brachial. Hitting it with enough shock will shut down the CNS, dropping the animal, and with sufficient hydraulic force (bullet expansion and wound channel size) the animal will bleed out before it can recover. It's an ideal shot placement. It's not ideal though if your particular bullet won't handle the amount of resistance it'll encounter though. That'll be dependent upon the construction type, sectional density (mass), and impact velocity though, as I've also mentioned.
Looking at Some Bullet Examples and Things to be Aware of
First off, in my experience, there's a big difference between "expansion" and "adequate expansion". For example, I have yet to see what I consider reliable and adequate expansion on Barnes, or similar mushrooming mono, below an impact velocity of 2000fps, although the LRX in particular is better than the TSX or TTSX.
Another example: The ELDX has a significantly thicker jacket than the ELDM, plus it has the interlock ring, but overall the ELDX is still a relatively soft bullet- in that it's not actually bonded and the jackets taper in thickness. The ELDM, on the other hand, does not taper in jacket thickness.
With too high of an impact velocity, the ELDX can still suffer from poor penetration and over-expansion. Where they differ the most from the ELDM is on the lower end of impact velocity. The thicker jacket and interlock ring will really start holding the bullet together more so than the ELDM at impact velocities dipping below like 1800fps, especially with lower resistance upon impact as well. So, the ELDM shines the most if you need a bullet that performs very well still at impact velocities around 2000fps and less.
For close range shots, what you need is a sufficient amount of mass, quantified best by sectional density, which is the amount of mass behind the frontal area of the bullet. How much you need will depend on the bullet construction and your expected impact velocity. An ELDX will still do better with more mass for close range (high impact velocity) shots due to how thin the jackets are at the ogive. If there's not enough mass behind the ogives, there might not be enough bullet left to do the job after the front starts coming apart on impact.
A bullet with thick jackets, but without tapering, would actually be better with LESS mass. You'd want less mass in order to lower the amount of over-penetration so that you can still achieve sufficient expansion. The Sierra TGK is a good example. The cores on those are also made of a harder lead alloy, which lowers the rate of expansion as well. That type of bullet will come apart at a slower rate having the same thickness at the ogive as at the bearing surface area. With too much mass, it'll just punch right through before it has a chance to fully expand. Lowering the mass (a lower SD) will lower the rate of penetration and balance out the expansion versus penetration. The same goes for actual bonded bullets too. If you go with a version with too much weight (mass/SD) you'll end up with more penetration than expansion. Lowering the weight helps balance the two. Same concept with mushrooming copper bullets too, but high impact velocity is even more crucial with those. You want relatively low mass/SD and a high impact velocity for best results with those. It's a bit different with the petal-shedding copper bullets, but I'll talk more about them later.
So, Do I Prefer Explosive Bullet Performance, and What Type of Shots do I Prefer?
I wouldn't say I prefer "explosive" performance, but wide wounding and a good deal of hydraulic force created. I don't want the bullet coming apart completely, before its job is done. That's why it's crucial to have sufficient mass with softer/frangible lead core bullets if impact velocity and/or impact resistance would be high.
As far as shot placements I prefer, I do tend to prefer shoulder shots, and I take them when able. That means only when the bullet wouldn't encounter too much resistance at too high of an impact velocity. I avoid direct shoulder shots if the bullet would impact above 2600fps, as my personal rule of thumb. I will place my shot just ahead or just behind the shoulder, depending on animal presentation and what my impact velocity would be and the particular bullet I'm using. The short answer is, with sufficient bullet mass, the bullet tends not to deflect so much and penetrates through. Steep quartering shots always tend to come with a lot of risk of deflection, in general. Just visualize the path of the bullet and where the vitals are with a particular shot placement and the anatomy the bullet must deal with. Place your shot where it makes the most sense.
Texas heart shots are always messy, and I would only take one if I really felt I had to. You're asking a lot of any bullet, plus risking spoiling meat by contaminating it with gut material. That said, I've seen many softer/frangible bullets actually perform very well with that shot and drop them dead on the spot.
There are many considerations that need to take place with the bullet you choose, how it inherently behaves terminally, and how to place your shot as required for the best possible end result. Understanding the limitations of the different bullet types and how to select the right one for your needs is the main hurdle.
Why Not Demand an Exit Wound?
Does an animal live longer and maintain blood pressure longer without an exit wound? Blood pressure has to do with how much/hard the pump (heart) is pushing it and how much resistance there is from the blood vessels. An exit hole through hide would not directly affect blood pressure. Only ruptures to blood vessels, arteries, veins, organs, and the heart would directly affect blood pressure. A loss in blood will reduce pressure too. The lungs hold the most blood, so destroying lungs will destroy a ton of blood vessels and allow for a massive loss of blood, especially if the heart is still pumping it all out into the chest cavity. An exit would only allow that blood to spill out onto the ground. That said, and exit can create a sucking chest wound and make breathing much more difficult and dying from asphyxiation can occur faster.
A bullet that completely destroys vitals but doesn't exit will tend to do more internal damage overall than a bullet that exited, because the one that exited held together more, retaining enough mass to continue to penetrate and carry energy along with it. Overall wounding will be less, as a result. That doesn't mean it still won't kill, or even quickly. An exit is only truly needed when a blood trail is required because tracking is needed.
You can definitely use too light of a soft/frangible lead core bullet for a particular scenario and/or place it on a spot where resistance upon impact would be too high. Without sufficient mass, that bullet will experience shallow penetration and over-expansion. It won't exit and most of the damage will be shallow too, sometimes more so on the surface. All the energy will have gone into the animal though, just not where it needs to go to do the most good. So, it's still crucial that you select the right bullet and with sufficient sectional density (mass). That's a key factor and something many hunters get wrong and don't understand.
I've seen match/target style bullets with plenty of mass punch right through on double shoulder shots. They're 100% capable of those shots and doing it reliably. You just need to understand how the particular one you're using is constructed and how much mass/SD is needed with that bullet for those shots, and what the limits are as far as impact velocity. If you take a double shoulder shot and it would impact outside its limits, you can't expect it to perform ideally. And just using any 'ole copper mono instead isn't going to automatically give you good performance with that shot either. Those bullets have limitations too and I've seen plenty of double shoulder shots with soft/frangible bullets that have outperformed many monos with the same shot.
If most of your hunting is done at closer ranges or you tend to use fast pushing cartridges that even medium distance shots impact at higher velocities, tougher constructed bullets will work well for you. If you take shots or have a good chance of taking shots where impact velocities would be 2000fps or lower, soft/frangible bullets will overall perform best for you. The best course of action is to simply use the heaviest for caliber version your rifle shoots well and to sufficient speeds. If you're using a soft/frangible bullet with an SD of .280 or more, you can use that without issue of shallow penetration and over-expansion for closer range shots, but you still get excellent wounding and terminal performance well below 1800fps impact velocities too. Bonded and/or mushrooming monos just don't do that as well.
Does Lower Impact Velocity Equal Less Bullet Penetration?
In general, no. Typically, when it comes to bullets, slower impact velocity results in more penetration and less expansion. So just because impact velocity might be slow, as well as the kinetic energy low, it doesn't mean it doesn't have enough power to make it all the way through.
A 55gr VMAX, as an example, impacting at 3200fps is highly unlikely to exit. It has a very low amount of mass/SD and is constructed soft and to come apart. However, that same bullet impacting at say 1200fps has a really good chance of exiting due to it not expanding as much at that velocity. Obviously, it's still not likely to exit on wide bodied game, but that's not my point.
A higher impact velocity would not necessarily mean more of a chance that it'll have the power to punch through, but rather it'll have more of a likelihood of expanding to the point of meeting the resistance required to arrest its forward momentum and not exit. Again, that's not necessary a bad thing, if it did its job by destroying the vitals and creating sufficient blood loss for a quick and clean kill.
So again, this is why having adequate mass with soft/frangible lead core bullets is so important. It'll ensure proper terminal performance. Conversely, you DO NOT want a high mass/SD with tougher constructed bullets because then you'll experience the opposite regarding expansion versus penetration. You'll have more penetration than expansion and before the bullet can inflict a massive amount of internal damage, it'll have already exited.
Even large calibers (like .338 and up) with soft/frangible lead core bullets can have this problem due to the sheer mass alone. The bullet can't expand fast enough before it exits the animal. Lower impact velocities can help with those large calibers, but with those and others of the tougher construction, you also don't want to dip below an impact velocity of 1800fps because then there's not going to be enough opposing force to create adequate expansion from the bullet. The large caliber bullets tend to have a smaller window regarding ideal impact velocity range.
Impacting Bone
Bone, in general, will result in more resistance to the bullet than muscle or organs. Any bullet hitting bone will expand more, or at a quicker rate, than if it only hit tissue. However, just because it hit bone doesn't mean it can't overcome it and penetrate through it and still have sufficient material left to inflict adequate damage to vitals for a quick and clean kill.
Also, when I talk about shoulder shots, I mean high shoulder shots, into the blade, not the socket or humorous bone. You're trying to hit the brachial plexus and the lungs, ideally.
I've hit many shoulders with a 208gr AMAX/ELDM, 215gr Berger Hybrid, 200gr Berger Hybrid, etc from a 300wm and never had what I'd consider a bad experience. Same as with a 195gr TMK from both a 308 and 300wm. Same as a 160gr TMK from a 7mm REM Mag, 140gr and 147gr ELDM from a 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5 SST. I mean the list goes on and on. My point is they work very well and without issue. In fact, I've found they work the best overall, especially at lower impact velocities for those longer shots. I've shot many bonded and other tougher constructed lead core bullets and monos too to compare results, with similar results.
Aaron Peterson
See Part 2 here: https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/what-goes-into-picking-the-right-bullet-part-2.376537/
Starting out, I'll give an example scenario: let's say a skeptical hunter has been on the internet looking at others' experiences hunting and has seen many folks talk about their successes using match style "target" bullets on their hunts. He decides to give it a go himself and buys a box of Hornady ELDMs or Sierra TMKs (just as an example), works up a good load, and is ready to go out on a hunt. He has this beautiful buck come walking out at 280 yards, it's quartering heavily towards him, yet he aims in his usual spot (just behind the shoulder). He takes the shot, the buck leaps, then makes an attempt at running, gets about 5-10 yards, and then piles up. Upon getting to the animal, he discovers there's no exit wound. This has already raised a flag for him, as he has been raised to desire an exit to create a blood trail if tracking is required, which typically it has been in the past with the bullets he's used to using. So now he's already thinking this bullet hasn't really performed as he'd hoped or thought it should. Now he begins to field dress the buck, and during the process has discovered the bullet did a good number on the rear lobe of the left lung. He then sees multiple lacerations on the liver, then sees bits of rumen and evidence the bullet traveled into the guts. He's now even more convinced this bullet didn't perform well due to the mess he's seeing. He's found bits of jacket and bits of lead here and there in the cavity and tissues as well. He's concluded the bullet completely came apart and has deemed it failed as a result. He's just made the conclusion that he was right, these bullets have no place in hunting as they just "blow up" and don't even produce an exit wound so you can properly track it.
So let's stop and take a closer look at that example. Let's clear our minds and any bias based on what you might have been previously taught. In that particular scenario, a tougher constructed bullet, such as the highly popular Remington Core Lokts, Nosler Accubonds or Partitions, Hornady ELDX or SST, etc, etc might have actually performed much worse with that particular shot. They typically wouldn't have come apart quite as much and while the animal likely would still have died at some point, it also most likely would have been a much slower death and very likely would have run a long way before succumbing to its wounds and/or asphyxiation. Yes, an exit would have, could have, proved useful in that scenario. It's very possible any of those bullets would have simply gone through the rear of the lung and punched out between the liver, and in that scenario, a lot of times death doesn't occur for a long time.
Bullets such as Sierra TMKs, Hornady ELDMs or A-Tips, Bergers of the hybrid design, etc are actually very forgiving to less than ideal shot placements like in that example because they do indeed come apart and they'll inflict much more damage, create much wider wounding, and cause a much faster death. The softer/frangible bullets still tend to shed enough material outwards that they'll still hit liver and/or lung when shot placements aren't ideal and are in that "no man's land", and will typically still cause enough blood loss to find and recover the animal not far from where it was shot.
What a lot of people see when using bullets like the TMKs, Bergers, ELDMs, etc is what looks like the bullet came apart and didn't exit, and to them it seems like poor performance, but what they fail to realize and comprehend is what's right in front of them. They actually DO have the animal and they're actually able to cut it open to see those results, rather than still out there trying to find the animal.
When a bullet actually fails, you don't have an animal to examine, typically, so it's easy to make that misconception. The animals that get hit with shots like that and with bullets like Core Lokts, etc, and the animal simply takes off never to be found, is when most people think they simply missed. In reality, most times they do hit the animal, but the bullet did not transfer enough energy to drop it, nor create sufficient blood loss in a timely manner to cause a quick enough death to even see the animal ever drop.
A lot of hunters tend to only look at the deer/animals recovered and create a bias on the perceived results based solely on those instances. They don't factor in the ones that got away because they either figure they missed, or they simply never see the results to even know what really happened inside the animal and with that particular bullet. In my example, they see a bullet that came apart and want to assume that it's poor performance, even if the animal dropped on the spot or only went a few feet or yards. They tend to focus on things they've heard or have been told and only focus on the small picture rather than the big picture and what's right in front of them.
Many people want to conclude that a bullet that didn't exit failed. Honestly, if it truly failed, you wouldn't have the animal to even see that it didn't exit. More times than not, the true failures are the times the animal was never recovered because the bullet simply didn't inflict sufficient trauma to cause a quick enough death, or death at all. Bullets that create exits that allow for a blood trail, and a blood trail that's actually needed to track it, are also, in my opinion and experience, to be considered not ideal performance since needing to track it via a blood trail is a sign that death did not occur as fast as it could or should have. That said, no bullet is going to work 100% of the time, every time. There are always going to be anomalies with both the bullet, and the particular animal. Some animals are dead on their feet and can defy all odds and logic and still manage to run without having any of its vital organs still intact. It's truly remarkable sometimes. These situations shouldn't be cause for rejection either.
The Meat Saver
Moving on, another common misconception and misunderstood subject involves meat loss/damage and meat saving shots.
The amount of meat damage with certain shots will always depend on bullet construction/composition, impact velocity and amount of resistance, and things like angle of the shot, muscle tension and density upon impact. A relaxed shoulder will typically result in a different amount of wounding versus a contracted shoulder. Even the bullet's RPMs has a big influence on wound channel size as well, in regard to centrifugal forces causing the bullet to come apart more or less.
Besides headshots and gut shots, it's near impossible to get reliable and repeatable results- killing quickly and humanely (not talking ethics here)- without losing at least some meat. It's just the nature of the beast. Proper bullet selection is crucial. By placing your shot accordingly, based on that particular bullet and the impact velocity it'll be at when it hits the animal, and at the distance you engaged it, you can balance out the amount of expansion and penetration and achieve best results with minimal meat damage yet still achieve an emphatic death.
Hunters that desire a quick and clean kill with zero meat loss in a repeatable, consistent, and reliable manner are living in a fantasy world, sorry to say. Sure, you can get lucky, but getting lucky is not a repeatable, consistent, and reliable thing.
Blood loss is what kills most efficiently, reliably, and quickly. Hitting an animal in the body and inflicting enough blood loss to kill the animal quickly, but not lose any meat is just not something you can count on. You run more of a risk losing an animal with bullet performance like that than you do dropping them and killing them quickly. And honestly, if you use the right bullet, within the limits of that bullet, you're really not going to lose a lot of meat with a shoulder shot. Guys act like shoulder meat is the best meat on the animal and that they're going to lose so many pounds of meat placing their shot there. That's simply not true. Not unless you used the wrong bullet or placed it in the shoulder when it would be impacting well outside its limits, as in too high of an impact velocity and/or amount of resistance for the bullet type and weight you're using. That'll result in shallow penetration and over-expansion near the surface. That indeed will result in more meat lost, but that's not the bullet's fault or necessarily the shot placement's fault either. It's the hunter's/shooter's fault for not knowing that would be a poor shot placement under the circumstances for that particular bullet. That's just the harsh reality of it. That's when a behind-the-should shot, or neck shot, or even head shot would actually be a better choice, if you're in that scenario with not an ideal bullet combo.
Bullets that don't shed weight and that hold together do tend to reduce meat loss/damage, but that comes at a trade-off. Typically, the overall amount of wounding is less with that type of bullet. If it impacts below its ideal velocity, the amount of wounding will be even less. If you miss vitals, you may very well miss recovering the animal too. A well-constructed cup and core bullet, for example, that will indeed shed weight can be much more forgiving in that particular scenario since it would produce wider wounding and may still reach vitals and be the difference between recovering the animal or not.
Ultimately, there are multiple factors to consider, but in my experience and all the research and studying I've done and with all the other info shared out there from others' hunts and experiences, I have concluded you simply cannot guarantee consistent, reliable, repeatable quick and clean kills with zero meat loss. It's always been worth it to me to pick the right bullet and place it accordingly and lose a little meat than it is to risk losing ALL the meat by potentially not recovering the animal.
You can't guarantee a particular presentation of the animal either to count on executing your favorite shot placement. You can, however, still place your shot in other ideal areas to give you desired results- that being a quick and clean kill and a recovered animal.
When a hunter starts talking about how they want a bullet that penetrates deep, doesn't damage meat, and gives them a big blood trail to follow, it immediately tells me they don't fully understand terminal ballistics and bullet construction/composition, and the anatomy of the animal they're hunting, along with the basics in effective killing of game animals. You do not NEED a blood trail if you truly know what you're doing, are using the best bullet for the job, and place it in the appropriate place according to the situation you're presented with. A lot of people like to use the phrase "if I do my part". Well, I say that means knowing all the things I just mentioned. Also, if you actually use the right bullet and can implement the high shoulder shot under your particular circumstances, you won't need a blood trail to track it.
Touching on Energy
This leads me to yet another misconception often discussed and touted as a crucial factor and something used as a minimum factor for a particular load/ammunition they're using, and that's energy. Personally, I stopped even looking at energy numbers several years ago now. It's just not even a concern of mine if I know the minimum impact velocity limitation of the particular bullet I'm using, and if I'll be within/above it. Impact velocity, sectional density (bullet mass), and shot placement are the main factors I worry about, and the things that influence those things. Energy is great, don't get me wrong, but it's only a potential and the bullet has to transfer that energy for it to really work in your favor.
Ultimately, you still need to inflict sufficient blood loss along with transferring any energy. That's what's most important. So, an extra 100-300fps or 200-400ft-lbs, for example, isn't really going to matter much. What really should be the focus is impact velocity as a threshold number, not energy. Energy, in regard to bullets and terminal ballistics, is only a potential, and if the bullet doesn't expand properly, it won't dump all the energy into the animal anyways. How a bullet performs terminally is dependent upon impact VELOCITY, the amount of resistance it encounters upon impact, and of course the construction/composition of the particular bullet used.
Most of the minimum energy figures you see stated and recommended out there are not good information and are made by those that either don't fully understand, or don't understand at all, terminal ballistics. It's unfortunately given many others a false sense of what is important too. When you see bullet manufacturers, conservation agencies, big names in the industry, etc. talk about minimum energy needed, it's easy to trust them and believe it's a figure you need to look at, but it's just not. If the bullet doesn't expand properly, it won't transfer that energy at the right time, or at all. What ultimately kills is blood loss. Transferring/dumping a ton of energy is beneficial only to shut down the central nervous system (CNS). That'll drop the animal, putting it into a temporary coma, allowing it to bleed out where it lies.
So ideally, yes you do want sufficient energy, but if you're not using the right bullet and not placing it in the right area, it won't matter. You could have 2000 ft-lbs of energy in a bullet at the time of impact, but if the bullet punches or pencils right through, most all that energy just exits with the bullet and the animal typically gets away. So, what did all that energy do for you? Nothing.
My figures with ideal impact velocity ranges come from tons of personal research and experience, not from advertisements from manufacturers. Once you get a really good grasp on terminal ballistics and bullet construction/composition, and know how certain types of bullets perform terminally, you can look at a particular bullet that you haven't used personally and you can already form a really good idea and presumption of how that bullet will perform based on that prior experience.
The thing that's helped hunters using magnum cartridges (or any cartridge pushing typical high velocities) is the velocity they achieve, not so much the energy they produce. The impact velocity tends to be more than sufficient at typical ranges they're used. With those cartridges though, and using softer constructed bullets below .260 sectional density, and on larger/tougher game, especially with shot placements where resistance upon impact is high, you can experience shallow penetration and over-expansion.
That said, there's actually plenty of vitals behind the shoulder, and if the animal is quartering to, pretty much all the vitals will be through the shoulder. So, with the right bullet, used where it would still be within its limits (sufficient mass, impact velocity, etc), that's a great placement even though resistance will typically be high. The lungs hold the most blood and a double lung shot will allow an animal to bleed out quicker than a heart shot, especially if the heart is still pumping. The biggest parts of the front lobes of the lungs are behind the shoulder of most animals. There's an autonomic plexus (nerve bundle) behind the shoulder too- the brachial. Hitting it with enough shock will shut down the CNS, dropping the animal, and with sufficient hydraulic force (bullet expansion and wound channel size) the animal will bleed out before it can recover. It's an ideal shot placement. It's not ideal though if your particular bullet won't handle the amount of resistance it'll encounter though. That'll be dependent upon the construction type, sectional density (mass), and impact velocity though, as I've also mentioned.
Looking at Some Bullet Examples and Things to be Aware of
First off, in my experience, there's a big difference between "expansion" and "adequate expansion". For example, I have yet to see what I consider reliable and adequate expansion on Barnes, or similar mushrooming mono, below an impact velocity of 2000fps, although the LRX in particular is better than the TSX or TTSX.
Another example: The ELDX has a significantly thicker jacket than the ELDM, plus it has the interlock ring, but overall the ELDX is still a relatively soft bullet- in that it's not actually bonded and the jackets taper in thickness. The ELDM, on the other hand, does not taper in jacket thickness.
With too high of an impact velocity, the ELDX can still suffer from poor penetration and over-expansion. Where they differ the most from the ELDM is on the lower end of impact velocity. The thicker jacket and interlock ring will really start holding the bullet together more so than the ELDM at impact velocities dipping below like 1800fps, especially with lower resistance upon impact as well. So, the ELDM shines the most if you need a bullet that performs very well still at impact velocities around 2000fps and less.
For close range shots, what you need is a sufficient amount of mass, quantified best by sectional density, which is the amount of mass behind the frontal area of the bullet. How much you need will depend on the bullet construction and your expected impact velocity. An ELDX will still do better with more mass for close range (high impact velocity) shots due to how thin the jackets are at the ogive. If there's not enough mass behind the ogives, there might not be enough bullet left to do the job after the front starts coming apart on impact.
A bullet with thick jackets, but without tapering, would actually be better with LESS mass. You'd want less mass in order to lower the amount of over-penetration so that you can still achieve sufficient expansion. The Sierra TGK is a good example. The cores on those are also made of a harder lead alloy, which lowers the rate of expansion as well. That type of bullet will come apart at a slower rate having the same thickness at the ogive as at the bearing surface area. With too much mass, it'll just punch right through before it has a chance to fully expand. Lowering the mass (a lower SD) will lower the rate of penetration and balance out the expansion versus penetration. The same goes for actual bonded bullets too. If you go with a version with too much weight (mass/SD) you'll end up with more penetration than expansion. Lowering the weight helps balance the two. Same concept with mushrooming copper bullets too, but high impact velocity is even more crucial with those. You want relatively low mass/SD and a high impact velocity for best results with those. It's a bit different with the petal-shedding copper bullets, but I'll talk more about them later.
So, Do I Prefer Explosive Bullet Performance, and What Type of Shots do I Prefer?
I wouldn't say I prefer "explosive" performance, but wide wounding and a good deal of hydraulic force created. I don't want the bullet coming apart completely, before its job is done. That's why it's crucial to have sufficient mass with softer/frangible lead core bullets if impact velocity and/or impact resistance would be high.
As far as shot placements I prefer, I do tend to prefer shoulder shots, and I take them when able. That means only when the bullet wouldn't encounter too much resistance at too high of an impact velocity. I avoid direct shoulder shots if the bullet would impact above 2600fps, as my personal rule of thumb. I will place my shot just ahead or just behind the shoulder, depending on animal presentation and what my impact velocity would be and the particular bullet I'm using. The short answer is, with sufficient bullet mass, the bullet tends not to deflect so much and penetrates through. Steep quartering shots always tend to come with a lot of risk of deflection, in general. Just visualize the path of the bullet and where the vitals are with a particular shot placement and the anatomy the bullet must deal with. Place your shot where it makes the most sense.
Texas heart shots are always messy, and I would only take one if I really felt I had to. You're asking a lot of any bullet, plus risking spoiling meat by contaminating it with gut material. That said, I've seen many softer/frangible bullets actually perform very well with that shot and drop them dead on the spot.
There are many considerations that need to take place with the bullet you choose, how it inherently behaves terminally, and how to place your shot as required for the best possible end result. Understanding the limitations of the different bullet types and how to select the right one for your needs is the main hurdle.
Why Not Demand an Exit Wound?
Does an animal live longer and maintain blood pressure longer without an exit wound? Blood pressure has to do with how much/hard the pump (heart) is pushing it and how much resistance there is from the blood vessels. An exit hole through hide would not directly affect blood pressure. Only ruptures to blood vessels, arteries, veins, organs, and the heart would directly affect blood pressure. A loss in blood will reduce pressure too. The lungs hold the most blood, so destroying lungs will destroy a ton of blood vessels and allow for a massive loss of blood, especially if the heart is still pumping it all out into the chest cavity. An exit would only allow that blood to spill out onto the ground. That said, and exit can create a sucking chest wound and make breathing much more difficult and dying from asphyxiation can occur faster.
A bullet that completely destroys vitals but doesn't exit will tend to do more internal damage overall than a bullet that exited, because the one that exited held together more, retaining enough mass to continue to penetrate and carry energy along with it. Overall wounding will be less, as a result. That doesn't mean it still won't kill, or even quickly. An exit is only truly needed when a blood trail is required because tracking is needed.
You can definitely use too light of a soft/frangible lead core bullet for a particular scenario and/or place it on a spot where resistance upon impact would be too high. Without sufficient mass, that bullet will experience shallow penetration and over-expansion. It won't exit and most of the damage will be shallow too, sometimes more so on the surface. All the energy will have gone into the animal though, just not where it needs to go to do the most good. So, it's still crucial that you select the right bullet and with sufficient sectional density (mass). That's a key factor and something many hunters get wrong and don't understand.
I've seen match/target style bullets with plenty of mass punch right through on double shoulder shots. They're 100% capable of those shots and doing it reliably. You just need to understand how the particular one you're using is constructed and how much mass/SD is needed with that bullet for those shots, and what the limits are as far as impact velocity. If you take a double shoulder shot and it would impact outside its limits, you can't expect it to perform ideally. And just using any 'ole copper mono instead isn't going to automatically give you good performance with that shot either. Those bullets have limitations too and I've seen plenty of double shoulder shots with soft/frangible bullets that have outperformed many monos with the same shot.
If most of your hunting is done at closer ranges or you tend to use fast pushing cartridges that even medium distance shots impact at higher velocities, tougher constructed bullets will work well for you. If you take shots or have a good chance of taking shots where impact velocities would be 2000fps or lower, soft/frangible bullets will overall perform best for you. The best course of action is to simply use the heaviest for caliber version your rifle shoots well and to sufficient speeds. If you're using a soft/frangible bullet with an SD of .280 or more, you can use that without issue of shallow penetration and over-expansion for closer range shots, but you still get excellent wounding and terminal performance well below 1800fps impact velocities too. Bonded and/or mushrooming monos just don't do that as well.
Does Lower Impact Velocity Equal Less Bullet Penetration?
In general, no. Typically, when it comes to bullets, slower impact velocity results in more penetration and less expansion. So just because impact velocity might be slow, as well as the kinetic energy low, it doesn't mean it doesn't have enough power to make it all the way through.
A 55gr VMAX, as an example, impacting at 3200fps is highly unlikely to exit. It has a very low amount of mass/SD and is constructed soft and to come apart. However, that same bullet impacting at say 1200fps has a really good chance of exiting due to it not expanding as much at that velocity. Obviously, it's still not likely to exit on wide bodied game, but that's not my point.
A higher impact velocity would not necessarily mean more of a chance that it'll have the power to punch through, but rather it'll have more of a likelihood of expanding to the point of meeting the resistance required to arrest its forward momentum and not exit. Again, that's not necessary a bad thing, if it did its job by destroying the vitals and creating sufficient blood loss for a quick and clean kill.
So again, this is why having adequate mass with soft/frangible lead core bullets is so important. It'll ensure proper terminal performance. Conversely, you DO NOT want a high mass/SD with tougher constructed bullets because then you'll experience the opposite regarding expansion versus penetration. You'll have more penetration than expansion and before the bullet can inflict a massive amount of internal damage, it'll have already exited.
Even large calibers (like .338 and up) with soft/frangible lead core bullets can have this problem due to the sheer mass alone. The bullet can't expand fast enough before it exits the animal. Lower impact velocities can help with those large calibers, but with those and others of the tougher construction, you also don't want to dip below an impact velocity of 1800fps because then there's not going to be enough opposing force to create adequate expansion from the bullet. The large caliber bullets tend to have a smaller window regarding ideal impact velocity range.
Impacting Bone
Bone, in general, will result in more resistance to the bullet than muscle or organs. Any bullet hitting bone will expand more, or at a quicker rate, than if it only hit tissue. However, just because it hit bone doesn't mean it can't overcome it and penetrate through it and still have sufficient material left to inflict adequate damage to vitals for a quick and clean kill.
Also, when I talk about shoulder shots, I mean high shoulder shots, into the blade, not the socket or humorous bone. You're trying to hit the brachial plexus and the lungs, ideally.
I've hit many shoulders with a 208gr AMAX/ELDM, 215gr Berger Hybrid, 200gr Berger Hybrid, etc from a 300wm and never had what I'd consider a bad experience. Same as with a 195gr TMK from both a 308 and 300wm. Same as a 160gr TMK from a 7mm REM Mag, 140gr and 147gr ELDM from a 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5 SST. I mean the list goes on and on. My point is they work very well and without issue. In fact, I've found they work the best overall, especially at lower impact velocities for those longer shots. I've shot many bonded and other tougher constructed lead core bullets and monos too to compare results, with similar results.
Aaron Peterson
See Part 2 here: https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/what-goes-into-picking-the-right-bullet-part-2.376537/
Last edited:
